Rosarelis Torres

Clinical and Molecular Genetic Analysis of 19 Wolfram Syndrome Kindreds Demonstrating a Wide Spectrum of Mutations in WFS1

Wolfram syndrome is an autosomal recessive neurodegenerative disorder characterized by juvenile-onset diabetes mellitus and progressive optic atrophy. mtDNA deletions have been described, and a gene (WFS1) recently has been identified, on chromosome 4p16, encoding a predicted 890 amino acid transmembrane protein. Direct DNA sequencing was done to screen the entire coding region of the WFS1 gene in 30 patients from 19 British kindreds with Wolfram syndrome. DNA was also screened for structural rearrangements (deletions and duplications) and point mutations in mtDNA. No pathogenic mtDNA mutations were found in our cohort. We identified 24 mutations in the WFS1 gene: 8 nonsense mutations, 8 missense mutations, 3 in-frame deletions, 1 in-frame insertion, and 4 frameshift mutations. Of these, 23 were novel mutations, and most occurred in exon 8. The majority of patients were compound heterozygotes for two mutations, and there was no common founder mutation. The data were also analyzed for genotype-phenotype relationships. Although some interesting cases were noted, consideration of the small sample size and frequency of each mutation indicated no clear-cut correlations between any of the observed mutations and disease severity. There were no obvious mutation hot spots or clusters. Hence, molecular screening for Wolfram syndrome in affected families and for Wolfram syndrome-carrier status in subjects with psychiatric disorders or diabetes mellitus will require complete analysis of exon 8 and upstream exons.

Cytogenetic and molecular characterization of random chromosomal rearrangements activating the drug resistance gene, MDR1/P-glycoprotein, in drug-selected cell lines and patients with drug refractory ALL

Drug resistance, both primary and acquired, is a major obstacle to advances in cancer chemotherapy. In vitro, multidrug resistance can be mediated by P‐glycoprotein (PGY1), a cell surface phosphoglycoprotein that acts to efflux natural products from cells. PGY1 is encoded by the MDR1 gene located at 7q21.1. Overexpression of MDR1 has been demonstrated in many cancers, both in patient tumors and in cell lines selected with a variety of chemotherapeutic agents. Recent studies in drug‐selected cell lines and patients samples have identified hybrid mRNAs comprised of an active, but apparently random, gene fused 5′ to MDR1. This observation indicates that random chromosomal rearrangements, such as translocations and inversions, leading to “capture” of MDR1 by constitutively expressed genes may be a mechanism for activation of this gene following drug exposure. In this study, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) using whole chromosome paints (WCP) and bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC)‐derived probes showed structural rearrangements involving 7q in metaphase and interphase cells, and comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) revealed high levels of amplification at chromosomal breakpoints. In an adriamycin‐selected resistant colon cancer line (S48–3s/Adr), WCP4/WCP7 revealed t(4;7)(q31;q21) and BAC‐derived probes demonstrated that the breakpoint lay between MDR1 and sequences 500–1000 KB telomeric to it. Similarly, in a subline isolated following exposure to actinomycin D (S48–3s/ActD), a hybrid MDR1 gene composed of heme oxygenase‐2 sequences (at 16p13) fused to MDR1 was identified and a rearrangement confirmed with WCP7 and a subtelomeric 16p probe. Likewise, in a paclitaxel‐selected MCF‐7 subline where CASP sequences (at 7q22) were shown to be fused to MDR1, WCP7 showed an elongated chromosome 7 with a homogeneously staining regions (hsr); BAC‐derived probes demonstrated that the hsr was composed of highly amplified MDR1 and CASP sequences. In all three selected cell lines, CGH demonstrated amplification at breakpoints involving MDR1(at 7q21) and genes fused to MDR1 at 4q31, 7q22, and 16p13.3. Finally, in samples obtained from two patients with drug refractory ALL, BAC‐derived probes applied to archived marrow cells demonstrated that a breakpoint occurred between MDR1 and sequences 500–1000 KB telomeric to MDR1, consistent with a random chromosomal rearrangement. These results support the proposal that random chromosomal rearrangement leading to capture and activation of MDR1 is a mechanism of acquired drug resistance. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 23:44–54, 1998.

Mutation screening of the Wolfram syndrome gene in psychiatric patients

Wolfram syndrome, a rare autosomal recessive neurodegenerative disorder, was originally described as a combination of familial juvenile-onset diabetes mellitus and optic atrophy. It was later demonstrated that Wolfram syndrome patients were highly prone to psychiatric disorders. Mutations in exon 8 of the Wolfram syndrome gene account for 88% of the patients with Wolfram syndrome. To examine whether the gene responsible for causing Wolfram syndrome is involved in psychiatric disorders, we screened exon 8 of the Wolfram syndrome gene for mutations in 119 patients with schizophrenia, one patient with schizoaffective disorder, 12 patients with bipolar disorder and 15 patients with major depression, using sequence analysis. In Wolfram syndrome patients, this gene has been shown to have primarily nonsense or frameshift mutations, which would result in a premature truncation of the protein. None of the psychiatric patients screened in this study carried these types of mutations. We identified, however, 24 new variations whose significance remains to be determined.

Tasimelteon for non-24-hour sleep–wake disorder in totally blind people (SET and RESET): two multicentre, randomised, double-masked, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials

BACKGROUND Most totally blind people have non-24-hour sleep-wake disorder (non-24), a rare circadian rhythm disorder caused by an inability of light to reset their circadian pacemaker. In two consecutive placebo-controlled trials (SET and RESET), we assessed safety and efficacy (in terms of circadian entrainment and maintenance) of once-daily tasimelteon, a novel dual-melatonin receptor agonist. METHODS We undertook the placebo-controlled, randomised, double-masked trials in 27 US and six German clinical research centres and sleep centres. We screened totally blind adults (18-75 years of age), who were eligible for the randomisation phase of SET if they had a non-24-hour circadian period (τ) of 24·25 h or longer (95% CI greater than 24·0 and up to 24·9 h), as calculated from measurements of urinary 6-sulphatoxymelatonin rhythms. For SET, we used block randomisation to assign patients (1:1) to receive tasimelteon (20 mg) or placebo every 24 h at a fixed clock time 1 h before target bedtime for 26 weeks. Patients who entered the open-label group receiving tasimelteon in SET or who did not meet the SET inclusion criteria but did meet the RESET inclusion criteria were screened for RESET. A subset of the patients who entered the open-label group before the RESET study and who had eligible τ values were screened for RESET after completing the open-label treatment. In RESET, we withdrew tasimelteon in a randomised manner (1:1) in patients who responded (ie, entrained) after a tasimelteon run-in period. Entrainment was defined as having τ of 24·1 h or less and a 95% CI that included 24·0 h. In SET, the primary endpoint was the proportion of entrained patients, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The planned step-down primary endpoint assessed the proportion of patients who had a clinical response (entrainment at month 1 or month 7 plus clinical improvement, measured by the Non-24 Clinical Response Scale). In RESET, the primary endpoint was the proportion of non-entrained patients, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety assessments included adverse events and clinical laboratory measures, assessed in all treated patients. These trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01163032 and NCT01430754. FINDINGS Between Aug 25, 2010, and July 5, 2012, we screened 391 totally blind patients for SET, of whom 84 (22%) were assigned to receive tasimelteon (n=42) or placebo (n=42). Two patients in the tasimelteon group and four in the placebo group discontinued the study before τ was measured, due to adverse events, withdrawal of consent, and a protocol deviation. Circadian entrainment occurred in eight (20%) of 40 patients in the tasimelteon group compared with one (3%) of 38 patients in the placebo group at month 1 (difference 17%, 95% CI 3·2-31·6; p=0·0171). Nine (24%) of 38 patients showed a clinical response, compared with none of 34 in the placebo group (difference 24%, 95% CI 8·4-39·0; p=0·0028). Between Sept 15, 2011, and Oct 4, 2012, we screened 58 patients for eligibility in RESET, 48 (83%) of whom had τ assessed and entered the open-label tasimelteon run-in phase. 24 (50%) patients entrained, and 20 (34%) were enrolled in the randomisation phase. Two (20%) of ten patients who were withdrawn to placebo remained entrained compared with nine (90%) of ten who continued to receive tasimelteon (difference 70%, 95% CI 26·4-100·0; p=0·0026). No deaths were reported in either study, and discontinuation rates due to adverse events were comparable between the tasimelteon (3 [6%] of 52 patients) and placebo (2 [4%] of 52 patients) treatment courses. The most common side-effects associated with tasimelteon in SET were headache (7 [17%] of 42 patients given tasimelteon vs 3 [7%] of 42 patients given placebo), elevated liver enzymes (4 [10%] vs 2 [5%]), nightmares or abnormal dreams (4 [10%] vs none), upper respiratory tract infection (3 [7%] vs none], and urinary tract infections (3 [7%] vs 1 [2%]). INTERPRETATION Once-daily tasimelteon can entrain totally blind people with non-24; however, continued tasimelteon treatment is necessary to maintain these improvements. FUNDING Vanda Pharmaceuticals.

Clinical assessment of drug-drug interactions of tasimelteon, a novel dual melatonin receptor agonist.

Tasimelteon ([1R‐trans]‐N‐[(2‐[2,3‐dihydro‐4‐benzofuranyl] cyclopropyl) methyl] propanamide), a novel dual melatonin receptor agonist that demonstrates specificity and high affinity for melatonin receptor types 1 and 2 (MT1 and MT2 receptors), is the first treatment approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for Non‐24‐Hour Sleep‐Wake Disorder. Tasimelteon is rapidly absorbed, with a mean absolute bioavailability of approximately 38%, and is extensively metabolized primarily by oxidation at multiple sites, mainly by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A2 and CYP3A4/5, as initially demonstrated by in vitro studies and confirmed by the results of clinical drug–drug interactions presented here. The effects of strong inhibitors and moderate or strong inducers of CYP1A2 and CYP3A4/5 on the pharmacokinetics of tasimelteon were evaluated in humans. Coadministration with fluvoxamine resulted in an approximately 6.5‐fold increase in tasimelteons area under the curve (AUC), whereas cigarette smoking decreased tasimelteons exposure by approximately 40%. Coadministration with ketoconazole resulted in an approximately 54% increase in tasimelteons AUC, whereas rifampin pretreatment resulted in a decrease in tasimelteons exposure of approximately 89%.

Pharmacokinetics of the dual melatonin receptor agonist tasimelteon in subjects with hepatic or renal impairment

Tasimelteon is a circadian regulator that resets the master clock in the suprachiasmatic nuclei of the hypothalamus by binding to both melatonin MT1 and MT2 receptors making it a dual melatonin receptor agonist. Tasimelteon has been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of Non‐24‐Hour Sleep‐Wake Disorder (Non‐24). Two prospective, single‐center, open‐label studies evaluated the pharmacokinetics of tasimelteon and its main metabolites after a single 20 mg dose administered to subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment or severe renal impairment, including subjects on dialysis compared to healthy controls. In subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment, exposure to tasimelteon after a single 20 mg dose, as measured by area under the plasma concentration‐time curve to infinity, was increased by approximately 2‐fold. There was no apparent relationship between tasimelteon clearance and renal function. No safety concerns were apparent in either study. Based on these results, the changes in the pharmacokinetics of tasimelteon due to mild or moderate hepatic or severe renal impairment are not considered clinically relevant, and no dose adjustment is necessary in these patients.

Absolute Bioavailability of Tasimelteon.

Tasimelteon is a novel dual melatonin receptor agonist and is the first treatment approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for Non-24-Hour Sleep-Wake Disorder. This study was conducted to assess the absolute bioavailability of tasimelteon and to further assess the single-dose pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of oral and intravenous (IV) routes of administration of the drug. This study was an open-label, single-dose, randomized, 2-period, 2-treatment, 2-sequence, crossover study in which 14 healthy volunteers were randomly administered tasimelteon as either a 20-mg capsule or IV administration of 2 mg infused over 30 minutes. Each subject received both treatments in a random order, separated by a washout period of 5 ± 2 days. The total clearance and volume of distribution of tasimelteon, from the IV treatment, were 505 mL per minute and 42.7 L, respectively. Based on the statistical comparison of dose-corrected area under the curve to infinity, the absolute bioavailability was 38%, with a 90% confidence interval of 27%–54%. The mean elimination half-life was the same for the oral and IV routes. The exposure ratios, oral-to-IV, for metabolites M9, M11, M12, and M13, were 133.27%, 118.28%, 138.76%, and 112.36%, respectively, suggesting presystemic or first-pass metabolism. Three (21.4%) subjects experienced a treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) during the study. All TEAEs were mild, considered related to study medication, and consistent with what has been seen in other studies. There were no deaths, serious adverse events, or discontinuations due to TEAEs. Both tasimelteon treatments were well tolerated during the study.